HN user
You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower.
My nest to Google Home got "updated". I just to ask hey google what is the thermostat set to and it would tell me 70-whatever degrees. Now after the update it tells me it is set to cool. Not that helpful, I have to ask, hey google what temperature is the thermostat set to, which is longer and I find annoying specific
Let nurses do more, let them write some prescriptions, let them open up a shop that puts casts on people with broken bones and minor things which they mostly do anyways.
Thanks to all the people here pointing out how bloated, overly broad and useless this is. I went to read it thinking I would pick up something applicable and it was written in such a overwrought humanless style that I gave up learning nothing and thought the problem was me. I am glad to learn I am not alone.
Yes, this is a clear example of how regulation was harming people (not all regulation is bad, but some of it is, usually the kind that gets between safe things and users)
It isn't there are large real world implications and difference in what each does and what risk it exposes to the end user.
This exact same thing was seen a Boeing, which isn't a model of good manufacturing, but it is semi-commmonplace for the line to have unapproved fixes.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/faa-found-staff-boeings-supplier-0...
It is just those are objective measures and lead to minority groups being discriminated against (notably Asians) having data to prove it.
Executives aren't able to time their sales of stock to events and they shouldn't be able to as it would lead to more manipulation. It is likely the sale of stock was planned ahead of the layoff announcement timing.
The time value money math seems pretty light here. The win condition is that you have a single person using up a table.
This is actually the best chance Microsoft has to bring Edge back from the dead and make people support using it.
It also forces them to get clean and give them another shot at sobriety.
We need to not treat all drugs the same. Heroin, Fentanyl, Meth are absolutely destructive forces and possession should force people into rehab or jail (their choice). Weed, acid, maybe coke should just be tickets and you can't do it/carry it around publically, openly sell it, etc.
Sure you could. it is better to just make a better product people prefer.
You can run a moderate amount of deficit without anything bad happening, and governments can do it indefinitely. HOWEVER, the amount you can run is not unlimited and can collapse the system if it gets too high. So you should be very careful with how much debt you are actually carrying and how much you add to it. Also you need to be careful because the amount it costs to carry your debt can fluctuate.
The same is somewhat true for corporations as well.
I actually feel the same way. Facebook actually has relevant ads to local events (some of which I am even interested in). As opposed to Google which is trying to drive my purchasing behavior. or Twitter which is borderline useless. It is really the local part the others I missing and where value is provided.
I wonder if that is an ease of use facebook thing for small marketers, better location data, or lower ad costs making it more worthwhile
More and more I get the feeling California doesn't care about the homelessness, undocumented immigrants, and Medicare. There are just a ton of grifters who make a lot of noise on the topics, but don't push for policies that would actually improve things. Or push for them in a way that is just more red tape that hinders actual results. Education is in the same bucket. Lots of noise from lots of people with bad ideas or bad implementations of ok ideas.
Just because they don't care now doesn't mean they won't in the future and like you said it is a potential disaster if they do. Because it will come at the worst time because that is when these things happen. I think a reasonable amount of debt is healthy and fine, but people want to spend and think that the bill doesn't ever come due. Sometimes inflation eats it and it was good that you spent the money, sometimes your face will get ripped off and you need to be careful.
Because the people in my life who aren't as technical as me and I support will be taken advantage. Sideloading would make their lives noticeably worse as scammers, hackers, and thieves trick them into doing dangerous things. Not giving them the options makes their phone a safer place, which is why people want it applied to others.
Smart tech users do lose out in the trade off, but it is a trade off.
That's exactly how you would fix it, the interests who control things don't want to pay market price. People in general hate paying what something costs when they have been paying the subsidized rate.
Tech companies should understand the risks with banks the same way banks need to understand tech risks. If a bank got ransomwared because they left the password to their webserver root/root no one in tech would ask "what did they do wrong?".
Sure, maybe it is prudent to do. We are bailing out people with extra insurance on money that was not guaranteed to be insured. We are given them free money to make them whole and we are going to let banks sell 75 cents for a dollar to the fed if they really need the cash. If this is the right thing to do lets' talk openly and plainly about it.
It can't? Strange how the government ended up controlling the Silk Road's stash
The reason is incentives and lack of protections. If banks don't eat the cost of fraud they don't properly protect people from being preyed upon.
Inflation is prices rising and people willing to pay them. It isn't gouging for if Mars wants to raise the price of a snickers 50 cents when their costs only rise 25 cents. That is them adjusting to the market. If money wasn't sloshing around people would go. I don't need a 50 cent more snickers bar or I will by a cheaper substitute good (pork instead of steak) and prices wouldn't rise as much. But the consumer is willing to pay more hence the price goes up.
It is amazing how fast net neutrality people disappeared when this was the topic
Also the largest which is Wal-Mart, I assume they sell food in the PNC
I swear people look at this these mergers the wrong way. The people who get squeezed are less likely to be the consumers and more likely to be the producers.
The BYU Volleyball incident is the most recent.
I really liked this talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UL2WDcNu_3A about culture and how to change it. The fun enjoyable nonseriousness aspect of it seen in your example applies to their findings